Since sattva-guna [the constituent of prakriti which makes for purity, intelligence, etc.] is the nature of mind, and since the mind is pure and undefiled like ether, what is called mind is, in truth, of the nature of knowledge.
Tom: Often the Self is said to be beyond the three gunas (Tamas, Rajas and Sattva). Here Sri Ramana tells us that pure sattva, or pure mind, which is the utterly and totally peaceful mind in its natural state, is actually the Self.
When it stays in that natural [i.e. pure] state, it has not even the name “mind”. It is only the erroneous knowledge which mistakes one for another that is called mind.
Tom: This pure sattva, unlike mixed sattva, is completely devoid of any rajas and tamas, and so is beyond all the gunas.
What was originally the pure sattva mind, of the nature of pure knowledge, forgets its knowledge-nature on account of nescience, gets transformed into the world under the influence of tamo-guna [i.e. the constituent of prakriti which makes for dullness, inertness, etc.], being under the influence of rajo-guna [i.e. the constituent of prakriti which makes for activity, passions, etc.], imagines “I am the body, etc.; the world is real”, it acquires the consequent merit and demerit through attachment, aversion, etc., and, through the residual impressions [vasanas] thereof, attains birth and death.
~ Sri Ramana Maharshi, Vichara Sangraham (Self Enquiry), Question 11
The following is the introduction to the text as found in the Collected Works of Sri Ramana Maharshi published by Sri Ramanasramam:
Self-enquiry is the first work the Maharshi ever wrote. It was written about 1901, that is, when he was a young man of about twenty-two. He was already a Jnani (Sage) in perfect realization of the Self, in the resplendent bliss of Divine Knowledge. At that time he was living in Virupaksha Cave on the hill of Arunachala. A number of disciples had already gathered round him. Although he had not actually taken a vow of silence, he seldom spoke, and so wrote his replies to certain questions put to him by Gambhiram Seshayya, one of the earliest devotees. The latter copied them in his diary. After his death this diary was obtained from his brother. The questions and answers were edited by Natanananda and published with Bhagavan’s approval under the name of Vichara Sangraham, or Self-Enquiry. Subsequently they were changed into the form of an essay. The original form has been adopted in the present work.
There is no youthfulness or immaturity in the work. The Master wrote with the authority of full spiritual knowledge, just as in his later years. Like all his expositions, verbal as well as written, this is concerned with practical questions of the path to realization of the Self, never with barren theory. However, it does differ from later expositions in one important respect: that is, that it describes not only the path of Self- enquiry but others also; meditation on one’s identity with the Self and a yogic path based on breath-control. He himself prescribed only Self-enquiry or submission to the Guru. He would say: “There are two ways: ask yourself `Who am I?’ or submit.”
Why did he include the mention of less direct and more elaborate methods in this first exposition? The obvious contingent reason is that the disciple for whom it was written had been reading books about these various methods and asked questions about them. Perhaps also, in a wider sense, it is appropriate that there should first be a general exposition of various methods before the lifelong instruction in that which he prescribed. Certainly the other methods, although described, are scarcely recommended.
The breath control that is described is, of course, not mere physical exercise. It is the spiritual significance of the exercise that makes it an elaborate science. `Science’ is indeed the right word for it, for it is a traditional Indian science of self- purification. This makes it abstruse for the Western reader who has no previous grounding in it, especially as, like all sciences, it has its technical vocabulary which does not permit adequate translation without lengthy notes. One has to remember that in writing this exposition the Maharshi knew that he could count on a technical knowledge of the science in question in the person for whom he wrote. The consolation for Western readers is to remember that he neither recommended nor prescribed this path and in his later works scarcely mentioned it. It is not necessary for them to learn its technicalities.
Tom Das 